But Trump then goes on, “And when he said that, I’m not saying it changed my mind.” (Italics added.) Let me repeat that: Contrary to the Times’ own news story, it is not the case that “Mr. Trump suggested he had changed his mind about the value of waterboarding.”

Click to expand...

Emphasis mine.

Despite being told by Gen. Mattis that torture was ineffective, Trump still seems to belive that:

Quote

“Look we have people that are chopping off heads and drowning people in steel cages and we’re not allowed to waterboard. But I’ll tell you what, I was impressed by that answer. It certainly does not—it’s not going to make the kind of difference that maybe a lot of people think. If it’s so important to the American people, I would go for it.

Click to expand...

No Mr. President-Elect. That's not the standard. We are fighting barbarism and unspeakable cruelty in our fight against ISIS. That is not justification to descend to a level of barbarity and inhumanity ourselves. And I don't care if Gallup poll shows 95% approval for torture or any other War Crime - it doesn't make it right.

It is unfair to ask our brave and honorable men and women in uniform, in the CIA, NSA, and every other Government agency to degrade and dishonor themselves by committing war crimes. And I think it is incumbent on the American people, and the US Congress to give them that assurance. A good start would be asking Trump's nominees for Secretary of Defense, Homeland Security, and any other pertinent office point blank: Will you order subordinates to commit war crimes, including waterboarding? And to further pass a resolution stating that any Government official who does issue such orders will be legally held to account. If not during this Administration, then during the next.

The more and more he says absurd things that he now will have clear guidance on - like the bright clear Constitutional line against using his office for personal profit and the basics of war crimes - the more I suspect he's being intentionally given enough rope to hang himself with.

Priebus wants him impeached and Pence in his seat by May. And he's helping him along.

Mattis is correct. Better to just kill them on the battle field. Can't wait for Trump to remove the shackles of Obama's restrictive rules of engagement. Our men and women will be safer and much more effective that day forward just as we were prior. Obamafail is out!

“torture” means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession… when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public office or other person acting in an official capacity.

Click to expand...

That is a definition that seems reasonably easy to understand. And not a matter that is subject to caprices and rationalization of a former reality-tv personality.

Mattis is correct. Better to just kill them on the battle field. Can't wait for Trump to remove the shackles of Obama's restrictive rules of engagement. Our men and women will be safer and much more effective that day forward just as we were prior. Obamafail is out!

Mattis is correct. Better to just kill them on the battle field. Can't wait for Trump to remove the shackles of Obama's restrictive rules of engagement. Our men and women will be safer and much more effective that day forward just as we were prior. Obamafail is out!

Click to expand...

right because people on the ground equals safe. maybe you should look into how many friendly fires deaths there were in the years since the first iraq war.

21% of Fallen Soldiers Die ‘Non-Hostile’ Deaths
More than 20 percent of the U.S. soldiers who have died in Iraq and Afghanistan were killed not by enemy combatants but in “non-hostile” circumstances, including friendly fire, suicide, illness and accidents.

The rate of non-hostile deaths in the U.S. military has been on the rise since the Korean War, according to an analysis of data from the U.S. Department of Defense.

During the Korean War, 8 percent of fallen military personnel died in non-hostile deaths, the department’s statistics show. The non-hostile death rate rose to 19 percent during the nearly decade-long Vietnam War. For the War on Terror, it tops 21 percent.

right because people on the ground equals safe. maybe you should look into how many friendly fires deaths there were in the years since the first iraq war.

Click to expand...

LOL at you trying to inform me who has spent more than a few years on the ground over there. Perhaps you should join the fight and experience what the rules of engagement that Obamafail implemented has done. Once you've done that come back and inform me of your experience.

I look forward to what your reaction would be when you're within a few hundred yards of a guys that would burn you in a cage or cut off your extremities while they film you screaming.

LOL at you trying to inform me who has spent more than a few years on the ground over there. Perhaps you should join the fight and experience what the rules of engagement that Obamafail implemented has done. Once you've done that come back and inform me of your experience.

I look forward to what your reaction would be when you're within a few hundred yards of a guys that would burn you in a cage or cut off your extremities while they film you screaming.

Actually, if somebody is a combatant who does not wear a uniform etc. they are not covered by the Geneva code. Water-boarding was a stupid idea by some idiot contractors who didn't understand psychology. I oppose it, but not because it is a war crime. Also, detaining combatants until hostilities cease is also not a crime. The problem is, because the extremists violate the Geneva code and do not wear uniforms (a true war crime), we cannot always be sure if the people we have detained are combatants. Thus, it makes good sense to treat them humanely.

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.